Catheter-directed thrombolysis versus thrombectomy for submassive and massive pulmonary embolism: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Controversy surrounds the optimal therapy for submassive and massive pulmonary embolism (PE). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) versus surgical and catheter-based thrombectomy in patients with submassive and massive PE. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Google Scholar for studies comparing outcomes of CDT versus thrombectomy in submassive and massive PE. Studies were identified and data were extracted by two independent reviewers. A random effects model was used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Outcomes included in-hospital mortality, procedural complications, hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmissions, and right ventricle/left ventricle (RV/LV) ratio improvement. RESULTS: Eight observational studies with 1403 patients were included, of whom 50.0 % received CDT. Compared to thrombectomy, CDT was associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality (RR 0.62; 95 % CI 0.43-0.89; p = 0.01) and similar rates of major bleeding (p = 0.61), blood transfusion (p = 0.41), stroke (p = 0.41), and atrial fibrillation (p = 0.71). The hospital and ICU LOS, 30-day readmissions, and degree of RV/LV ratio improvement were similar between the two strategies (all p > 0.1). In subgroup analyses, in-hospital mortality was similar between CDT and catheter-based thrombectomy (p = 0.48) but lower with CDT compared with surgical thrombectomy (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with submassive and massive PE, CDT was associated with similar in-hospital mortality compared to catheter-based thrombectomy, but lower in-hospital mortality compared to surgical thrombectomy. Procedural complications, LOS, 30-day readmissions, and RV/LV ratio improvement were similar between CDT and any thrombectomy. Randomized controlled trials are indicated to confirm our findings.

Outcomes of viral myocarditis in patients with and without COVID-19: a nationwide analysis from the United States.

Cardiovascular complications contribute to 40% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related deaths. The viral myocarditis associated with COVID-19 accounts for significant morbidity and mortality. How COVID-19 myocarditis compares to other viral myocardites is unknown. Methods: The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study using the National Inpatient Sample database to identify adult patients hospitalized for viral myocarditis in 2020 and to compare outcomes between those with and without COVID-19. The primary study outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital complications, length of stay, and total costs. Results: The study population included 15 390 patients with viral myocarditis, of whom 5540 (36%) had COVID-19. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, patients with COVID-19 had higher odds of in-hospital mortality [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.46, 95% CI 2.57-4.67], cardiovascular complications (aOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.14-1.87) including cardiac arrest (aOR 2.07, 95% CI 1.36-3.14), myocardial infarction (aOR 2.97, 95% CI 2.10-4.20), venous thromboembolism (aOR 2.01, 95% CI 1.25-3.22), neurologic complications (aOR 1.82, 95% CI 1.10-2.84), renal complications (aOR 1.72, 95% CI 1.38-2.13), and hematologic complications (aOR 1.32, 95% CI 1.10-1.74), but lower odds of acute heart failure (aOR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44-0.80). The odds of pericarditis, pericardial effusion/tamponade, cardiogenic shock, and the need for vasopressors or mechanical circulatory support were similar. Patients with COVID-19 had longer length of stay (7 days vs. 4 days, P<0.01) and higher total costs ($21,308 vs. $14,089, P<0.01). Conclusions: Among patients with viral myocarditis, COVID-19 is associated with higher in-hospital mortality and cardiovascular, neurologic, renal, and hematologic complications compared to non-COVID-19 viruses.